by LanercostRoyal » 14 Jun 2012 10:39
by SCIAG » 14 Jun 2012 19:58
tomrfcurz Wages should not be a problem in theory as i have been told and would have assumed anyway that he is not in the upper echelons of Chelsea's pay structure.
by DOYLERSAROYALER » 14 Jun 2012 20:10
SCIAGtomrfcurz Wages should not be a problem in theory as i have been told and would have assumed anyway that he is not in the upper echelons of Chelsea's pay structure.
Only the very lowest players at Chelsea, those who don't really have a future at the club but might fetch a six figure fee from the Football League, would fit with our current pay structure. Nathaniel Chalobah is on £15,000 a week and Lucas Piazon is on £20,000 a week, for example. I imagine Lukaku is on around £40,000 a week given his high transfer fee compared to Piazon and the wages he probably received at Anderlecht. We'd theoretically need to find about £2m to take him on loan for a year, though I imagine Chelsea would be happen to subsidise a sizable proportion of that.
by Friday's Legacy » 14 Jun 2012 20:37
SCIAGtomrfcurz Wages should not be a problem in theory as i have been told and would have assumed anyway that he is not in the upper echelons of Chelsea's pay structure.
Only the very lowest players at Chelsea, those who don't really have a future at the club but might fetch a six figure fee from the Football League, would fit with our current pay structure. Nathaniel Chalobah is on £15,000 a week and Lucas Piazon is on £20,000 a week, for example. I imagine Lukaku is on around £40,000 a week given his high transfer fee compared to Piazon and the wages he probably received at Anderlecht. We'd theoretically need to find about £2m to take him on loan for a year, though I imagine Chelsea would be happen to subsidise a sizable proportion of that.
by LoyalRoyalFan » 14 Jun 2012 21:33
by royalp-we » 14 Jun 2012 21:39
by Friday's Legacy » 14 Jun 2012 21:42
LoyalRoyalFan How do we know your genuine?
by LoyalRoyalFan » 14 Jun 2012 21:49
Friday's LegacyLoyalRoyalFan How do we know your genuine?
I don't ask you to trust what I say, but what do I get out of passing on false information? I'm an overweight, balding mid-thirty something; not a spotty 16 year-old craving the attention of others. I only pass on what I get told from far more reliable people than myself.
by thirtyyarder » 14 Jun 2012 21:51
Friday's Legacy I'm an overweight, balding mid-thirty something
by PistolPete » 14 Jun 2012 21:54
Friday's Legacy I only pass on what I get told from far more reliable people than myself.
by Friday's Legacy » 14 Jun 2012 21:59
LoyalRoyalFanFriday's LegacyLoyalRoyalFan How do we know your genuine?
I don't ask you to trust what I say, but what do I get out of passing on false information? I'm an overweight, balding mid-thirty something; not a spotty 16 year-old craving the attention of others. I only pass on what I get told from far more reliable people than myself.
List some of the 'rumours' you have got right.
by royalsmudge » 15 Jun 2012 10:02
by Dare to Dr£am » 15 Jun 2012 10:43
by robinsfriday » 15 Jun 2012 10:48
Friday's Legacy
When the expected deadline for the TSI deal to go through had passed, everyone was crying out for an update from the club. Nothing was forthcoming and people were starting to fear the worst. I was told 4-5 days in advance that the club were preparing an announcement, and when it came a few days later, I had quoted almost word for word what the club released. In fact I got a few scoops on TSI, so much so that Jonny Fordham got some grief about it and blocked a number of followers on Twitter, including myself, bizzarly.
I also knew some ten days before it went to press that the Daily Mail were building a story on TSI, and that they had been speaking to Chris Samuelson. It's all in the TSI thread if you really feel the need to find it.
As I said, I only pass on what I hear from friends far better placed than myself. I don't claim to be in the know, and more to the point I get nothing out of winding anyone up. There is a small minority on here and a few on Twitter that I have got to know quite well, and they have been able to corroborate some of what I hear, and vice versa, thus building mutual trust. No disrespect to yourself, but I would be more concerned if I lost their trust than some of those on here.
by YateleyRoyal » 15 Jun 2012 11:33
Friday's LegacySCIAGtomrfcurz Wages should not be a problem in theory as i have been told and would have assumed anyway that he is not in the upper echelons of Chelsea's pay structure.
Only the very lowest players at Chelsea, those who don't really have a future at the club but might fetch a six figure fee from the Football League, would fit with our current pay structure. Nathaniel Chalobah is on £15,000 a week and Lucas Piazon is on £20,000 a week, for example. I imagine Lukaku is on around £40,000 a week given his high transfer fee compared to Piazon and the wages he probably received at Anderlecht. We'd theoretically need to find about £2m to take him on loan for a year, though I imagine Chelsea would be happen to subsidise a sizable proportion of that.
We matched Swansea's terms for Sigurdsson (35k a week). For the right player we are more than prepared to pay out a sizeable wage. We will obviously want to keep the wages down as much as possible, but this is a very different football club now, and if we can convince players to come here, we will raise a few eyebrows. The problem is just that though! Enquiries about the Cole's and Defoe's are very genuine, as is our bid for Gylfi Sigurdsson; but convincing these people to come to a newly promoted club is very unlikely. Nevertheless, if they were prepared to come, we would cough up.
by bracksroyal10 » 02 Aug 2012 11:20
by Pepe the Horseman » 02 Aug 2012 11:22
by cmonurz » 02 Aug 2012 11:41
by loyalroyal4life » 02 Aug 2012 12:15
by USA_Loyal_Royal » 02 Aug 2012 14:01
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 56 guests